Robert Raeder, Manan Arora, Michele Bertocci, Henry W Chase, Alexander S Skeba, Genna Bebko, Haris A Aslam, Simona Graur, Osasumwen Benjamin, Yiming Wang, Richelle Stiffler, Mary L Phillips
{"title":"奖励大小特异性延迟贴现区分躁狂和抑郁风险。","authors":"Robert Raeder, Manan Arora, Michele Bertocci, Henry W Chase, Alexander S Skeba, Genna Bebko, Haris A Aslam, Simona Graur, Osasumwen Benjamin, Yiming Wang, Richelle Stiffler, Mary L Phillips","doi":"10.3758/s13415-025-01307-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Mania/hypomania, the pathognomonic feature of bipolar disorder (BD), is characterized by elevated impulsivity, often assessed via delay discounting-the preference for smaller, immediate versus larger, delayed rewards. It remains unclear whether delay discounting differentiates BD from non-BD individuals or serves as an objective behavioral marker of mania/hypomania versus depression risk. Bipolar disorder (n = 40) and non-BD (n = 187) individuals were recruited, with the latter encompassing a range of mania/hypomania and depression risk and stratified into mania/hypomania and depression risk tertiles. Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn's tests evaluated delay discounting rates (k values), assessed via the 27-Item Monetary Choice Questionnaire, across both risk groups compared to the BD group. Significant group effects were found for overall and geomean k values in both mania/hypomania (overall k: χ<sup>2</sup>(3) = 8.15, p = 0.043; geomean k: χ<sup>2</sup>(3) = 8.40, p = 0.038) and depression risk groups (overall k: χ<sup>2</sup>(3) = 8.30, p = 0.04; geomean k: χ<sup>2</sup>(3) = 8.75, p = 0.033). Only k values for medium reward magnitudes were significant for both mood risk stratifications (corrected α = 0.05/3 = 0.0167). Bipolar disorder had significantly higher k versus low-risk mania/hypomania individuals (adjusted p = 0.012), as did high-risk versus low-risk mania/hypomania individuals (adjusted p = 0.039). Bipolar disorder had higher k versus high-risk depression individuals (adjusted p = 0.005), as did low-risk versus high-risk depression individuals (adjusted p = 0.029). Bipolar disorder had significantly higher k for medium reward magnitudes versus high-risk depression-only (W = 398, p < 0.001), but not versus high-risk mania/hypomania-only (W = 587.5, p = 0.368) individuals. Delay discounting for medium reward magnitudes differentiates BD from non-BD individuals and distinguishes heightened mania/hypomania risk from depression risk, supporting its potential as an objective behavioral marker for mania/hypomania risk detection.</p>","PeriodicalId":50672,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience","volume":" ","pages":"1473-1484"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reward magnitude-specific delay discounting differentiates mania versus depression risk.\",\"authors\":\"Robert Raeder, Manan Arora, Michele Bertocci, Henry W Chase, Alexander S Skeba, Genna Bebko, Haris A Aslam, Simona Graur, Osasumwen Benjamin, Yiming Wang, Richelle Stiffler, Mary L Phillips\",\"doi\":\"10.3758/s13415-025-01307-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Mania/hypomania, the pathognomonic feature of bipolar disorder (BD), is characterized by elevated impulsivity, often assessed via delay discounting-the preference for smaller, immediate versus larger, delayed rewards. It remains unclear whether delay discounting differentiates BD from non-BD individuals or serves as an objective behavioral marker of mania/hypomania versus depression risk. Bipolar disorder (n = 40) and non-BD (n = 187) individuals were recruited, with the latter encompassing a range of mania/hypomania and depression risk and stratified into mania/hypomania and depression risk tertiles. Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn's tests evaluated delay discounting rates (k values), assessed via the 27-Item Monetary Choice Questionnaire, across both risk groups compared to the BD group. Significant group effects were found for overall and geomean k values in both mania/hypomania (overall k: χ<sup>2</sup>(3) = 8.15, p = 0.043; geomean k: χ<sup>2</sup>(3) = 8.40, p = 0.038) and depression risk groups (overall k: χ<sup>2</sup>(3) = 8.30, p = 0.04; geomean k: χ<sup>2</sup>(3) = 8.75, p = 0.033). Only k values for medium reward magnitudes were significant for both mood risk stratifications (corrected α = 0.05/3 = 0.0167). Bipolar disorder had significantly higher k versus low-risk mania/hypomania individuals (adjusted p = 0.012), as did high-risk versus low-risk mania/hypomania individuals (adjusted p = 0.039). Bipolar disorder had higher k versus high-risk depression individuals (adjusted p = 0.005), as did low-risk versus high-risk depression individuals (adjusted p = 0.029). Bipolar disorder had significantly higher k for medium reward magnitudes versus high-risk depression-only (W = 398, p < 0.001), but not versus high-risk mania/hypomania-only (W = 587.5, p = 0.368) individuals. Delay discounting for medium reward magnitudes differentiates BD from non-BD individuals and distinguishes heightened mania/hypomania risk from depression risk, supporting its potential as an objective behavioral marker for mania/hypomania risk detection.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50672,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1473-1484\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-025-01307-y\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/5/28 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-025-01307-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
躁狂症/轻躁症是双相情感障碍（BD）的病理特征，其特征是冲动性升高，通常通过延迟折扣来评估——偏好较小的、即时的奖励，而不是较大的、延迟的奖励。延迟折扣是否能将双相障碍与非双相障碍区分开来，或作为躁狂/轻躁狂与抑郁风险的客观行为标志，目前尚不清楚。双相情感障碍（n = 40）和非双相情感障碍（n = 187）被招募，后者包括一系列躁狂/轻躁狂和抑郁风险，并被分为躁狂/轻躁狂和抑郁风险三组。Kruskal-Wallis和Dunn的测试评估了延迟折现率（k值），通过27项货币选择问卷进行评估，与BD组相比，两个风险组的延迟折现率（k值）。躁狂症/轻躁症患者的总k值和几何k值均存在显著的组效应(χ2(3) = 8.15, p = 0.043；几何系数k: χ2(3) = 8.40, p = 0.038)和抑郁风险组(总体k: χ2(3) = 8.30, p = 0.04；几何系数k: χ2(3) = 8.75, p = 0.033)。只有中等奖励的k值在两种情绪风险分层中都是显著的（修正后的α = 0.05/3 = 0.0167）。双相情感障碍患者的k值明显高于低风险躁狂/轻躁狂患者（校正p = 0.012），高风险与低风险躁狂/轻躁狂患者的k值也明显高于低风险躁狂/轻躁狂患者（校正p = 0.039）。双相情感障碍患者与高危抑郁症患者相比有更高的k值（校正p = 0.005），低危抑郁症患者与高危抑郁症患者相比也有更高的k值（校正p = 0.029）。双相情感障碍在中等奖励量级上的k值显著高于高危抑郁个体（W = 398, p < 0.001），但与高危躁狂症/轻躁症个体相比（W = 587.5, p = 0.368）没有显著差异。中等奖励的延迟折扣区分了双相障碍和非双相障碍个体，区分了躁狂/轻躁狂高风险和抑郁风险，支持了它作为躁狂/轻躁狂风险检测的客观行为标记的潜力。
Reward magnitude-specific delay discounting differentiates mania versus depression risk.
Mania/hypomania, the pathognomonic feature of bipolar disorder (BD), is characterized by elevated impulsivity, often assessed via delay discounting-the preference for smaller, immediate versus larger, delayed rewards. It remains unclear whether delay discounting differentiates BD from non-BD individuals or serves as an objective behavioral marker of mania/hypomania versus depression risk. Bipolar disorder (n = 40) and non-BD (n = 187) individuals were recruited, with the latter encompassing a range of mania/hypomania and depression risk and stratified into mania/hypomania and depression risk tertiles. Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn's tests evaluated delay discounting rates (k values), assessed via the 27-Item Monetary Choice Questionnaire, across both risk groups compared to the BD group. Significant group effects were found for overall and geomean k values in both mania/hypomania (overall k: χ2(3) = 8.15, p = 0.043; geomean k: χ2(3) = 8.40, p = 0.038) and depression risk groups (overall k: χ2(3) = 8.30, p = 0.04; geomean k: χ2(3) = 8.75, p = 0.033). Only k values for medium reward magnitudes were significant for both mood risk stratifications (corrected α = 0.05/3 = 0.0167). Bipolar disorder had significantly higher k versus low-risk mania/hypomania individuals (adjusted p = 0.012), as did high-risk versus low-risk mania/hypomania individuals (adjusted p = 0.039). Bipolar disorder had higher k versus high-risk depression individuals (adjusted p = 0.005), as did low-risk versus high-risk depression individuals (adjusted p = 0.029). Bipolar disorder had significantly higher k for medium reward magnitudes versus high-risk depression-only (W = 398, p < 0.001), but not versus high-risk mania/hypomania-only (W = 587.5, p = 0.368) individuals. Delay discounting for medium reward magnitudes differentiates BD from non-BD individuals and distinguishes heightened mania/hypomania risk from depression risk, supporting its potential as an objective behavioral marker for mania/hypomania risk detection.
期刊介绍：
Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience (CABN) offers theoretical, review, and primary research articles on behavior and brain processes in humans. Coverage includes normal function as well as patients with injuries or processes that influence brain function: neurological disorders, including both healthy and disordered aging; and psychiatric disorders such as schizophrenia and depression. CABN is the leading vehicle for strongly psychologically motivated studies of brain–behavior relationships, through the presentation of papers that integrate psychological theory and the conduct and interpretation of the neuroscientific data. The range of topics includes perception, attention, memory, language, problem solving, reasoning, and decision-making; emotional processes, motivation, reward prediction, and affective states; and individual differences in relevant domains, including personality. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience is a publication of the Psychonomic Society.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
